Light Speed’s questions… I will try to answer them for you. Many of the forum members are familiar with these questions and answers so I am a little surprised that you are asking as they have all been discussed here.

Do you know why they never received significant NRE? I expect you are referring to the GaAs platform.

They had problems with the GaAs platform in terms of the fourth terminal. So could they have found someone who would give them NRE to continue development?  I don’t know. Did  they want to  continue development on their own on the GaAs platform. I think the answer to  that is  clearly no they have a high demand platform that they are now developing.

Do you know why we have not received any technical updates to let us know the tech is on track seen as we are in Q4?

Do I know? I think the reporting policy is pretty clear and I expect  that we will receive an update shortly as per normal  practice during the quarterly reports. That being said did you read my previous post regarding the significant reduction to propogation loss of the dielectric waveguides? As an example can you tell me why that was not reported in a NR? Or even the latest patent? Many companies would jump all over those kinds of items to  get their  name in the public domain.

Do you know why they didn’t sell the detector? No I don’t. It had exceptional responsivity and a technical expert I talk to who was a past director felt it would have significant military applications. The company took  a hard left turn on that one and said it would not provide a differentiated solution and was applicable to  multi mode applications which industry was moving away from in favour fof in favour of single mode applications which naturally became the focus of POET with the development of the dielectric optical interposer. Which if you look at Oz’s linked report, industry is not expecting a breakthrough on until 2020…POET is now well of that technology curve.

Do you know why they filed this prospectus given that on the last two financings they said that there were many ways to raise cash and a dilutive financing was off the table?

The prospectus replaces the one that expired. And we have no  idea when and if it will be used but it is  definitely a proactive instrument that can be used when appropriate to  do  so which could include many possibilities outside of a public offering. And forgive me for not knowing the answer to  trhis  but you said the company reported that there were many ways to  raise cash and dilutive financing was off the table. Can you provide the source of that statement? I really don’t recall them making that statement. Thanks.

Regarding employees. Could they have this increased head count because they need it for the Singapore grant?

I think that is an extreme reach on your part. I would suggest you review the conditions of that agreement .